1 / 26

64-Straw Prototype

64-Straw Prototype . Vito Palladino CERN 07/ 04/2013. Outlines. The 64-straw prototype, in building 154, is our “easy” hand-on test bench. We are using the prototype to: Debug the DAQ Study the time resolution The r/t dependence HV and gas mixture signal dependence

thuong
Download Presentation

64-Straw Prototype

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 64-Straw Prototype Vito Palladino CERN 07/04/2013

  2. Outlines The 64-straw prototype, in building 154, is our “easy” hand-on test bench. We are using the prototype to: • Debug the DAQ • Study • the time resolution • The r/t dependence • HV and gas mixture signal dependence • CARIOCA behavior and characterization (charge injection)

  3. Experimental Setup Trigger Scintillators (10x10x1 cm3 ) ~10cm ~1m Experimental conditions: HV 1750V Gas 70-30 Ar-CO2

  4. DAQ • The DAQ debugging was one of the main task of the activities done on the prototype. The DAQ anomalous behavior was analyzed and the bug found. New data from prototype were encouraging, and a data taking campaign started. The DAQ uses a SRAMs as buffers for data and trigger timestamps, SRAMs are not overwritten (as we will do in the final version) data are acquired and than the buffer read off line.

  5. DAQ • During the TR we observed data in channel suppose to be silent, the plot shows the data from 4 covers and only ch 38 is expected:

  6. DAQ • A similar plot done after the bug fixing (1 cover), only ch 3 was expected:

  7. TrailingEdge • Trailing edge expected at the same time (maximum drift distance is always the straw radius):

  8. Leading Edge • Leading edge for time resolution measurement needs trigger time resolution subtraction and dependence from the wire distance:

  9. Time Width • The time with has been measured using events with single edges couple:

  10. Time Width • The time with distribution shows two behavior, this is enhanced in the leading vs trailing plot:

  11. Charge Injection • In order to study the CARIOCA response to known signals we inject charge (~40 fC) from the rear-end of the straw (ch 7 -> CARIOCA analog output). SRB (NIM trigger input) Pulse Generator (Dual-timer) Attenuator RC circuit CARIOCA CH 7 Straw 7 Back-end

  12. Charge Injection • The trigger-data delay has been measured and we verified, that the peak we were studying was actually the signal peak (threshold 0.95 V):

  13. Charge Injection • I took advantage of the signal reproducibility to have the first sampling of the signal “observed” by CARIOCA.

  14. Charge Injection • I took advantage of the signal reproducibility to have the first sampling of the signal “observed” by CARIOCA. TH (?)

  15. Charge Injection • I took advantage of the signal reproducibility to have the first sampling of the signal “observed” by CARIOCA.

  16. Charge Injection • I took advantage of the signal reproducibility to have the first sampling of the signal “observed” by CARIOCA.

  17. Conclusions And Schedule • We are finalizing the DAQ debugging, main problems have been faced and solved. Still we have to commission the on-line readout or SRAMs • First results with prototype are conflicting. Charge injection shows that the DAQ and electronics can reach optimal results, but cosmic data shows time resolution that are not clear. • We have to study the behavior of the electronics coupled with the detector. • In particular some tests are planned for the upcoming weeks/months: • Using the external tracker (micromegas) to: • Measure the r/t curve • Measure the (leading) time resolution as function of wire distance • Measure the data delay respect to the trigger (done -> 2.86 ms) • Comparison with previous COVER version • Trigger time resolution (on going in 154)

  18. Run 368 • 300 out of ~600 bursts match triggers quality cut (same number of triggers in the SRBs) • 132 bursts out of 300 good for data analysis (contamination lower than 5 per mill )

  19. Results (wire distance ch 10) Wire distance measurement has been performed using the drift velocity curve measured during the test beam Time (ns)

  20. Technical Run Experimental Setup y • 2 views • 4 covers per view • 2 SRB read via VME z x Jura Saleve View V View U = active regions

  21. Beam Profile • We were able to see the beam profile as we expected, warning:the straws are not plotted in order. Entries per Channel/Spill

  22. Burst Structure • Also the burst time structure has been measured. Events/333ms SOB EOB

  23. Bad Words and Data Contamination • Data suffers of contamination due to lost of part of data structure, some times this was recognizable and data can be used. But in many cases this was not possible. Spill Time Structure Events/333ms

  24. Bad Words and Data Contamination • Data suffers of contamination due to lost of part of data structure, some times this was recognizable and data can be used. But in many cases this was not possible. Beam Profile Structure Entries per Channel

  25. Data Selection • Readout problems -> data selection • Mismatch between the SRBs number of triggers • “Bad Words” • Analysis performed on a run taken in low intensity conditions (0.1 x1011 protons on T10) • Quality cuts applied to data contamination (<5 per mill)

  26. Results (“assumed” drift velocity curve) Wire Distance (mm) Drift Time (ns)

More Related